2001:951 - CLONMAGADDEN WATER SCHEME, Meath

During monitoring of groundworks associated with the Clonmagadden Water Scheme in June and July of 2001 several areas of archaeological potential were identified. Limited excavation was conducted of Site A, which revealed a small bowl-shaped cut feature filled with burnt soil. Most of the remaining features were not directly affected by the pipe trench and could therefore be preserved in situ.

However, Site K, which appeared initially as a small and localised concentration of charcoal, lay directly in the path of the pipeline. When investigated, the feature produced a well-made flint arrowhead from its uppermost layer. This arrowhead has parallels in early and middle Bronze Age contexts (Dr Sarah Milliken, pers. comm.). It proved difficult to define any periphery to this feature during initial investigation and the existence of other possible associated features was noted in the surrounding area.

The final excavation area measured 14m east–west by 7m. Hand-trowelling of the excavation area revealed a far more complex arrangement of features/contexts than was previously apparent. In total, six separate archaeological features were identified, four of which represented cut linear features. Several metres of a substantial ditch with a bowl-shaped terminus at one end appeared (C1). It measured approximately 1.3m in width by 0.5m in depth, and one side of the cut followed a semicircular course on the western part of the excavation area; the other side of the cut veered off in the opposite direction into the boundary of the excavation area, thereby creating the impression of a wide and shallow artificial depression with a similar fill to that encountered in the ditch component. A similar stratigraphy was also evident in the open pipe trench to the west of the excavation area. The fill of C1 consisted of a layered arrangement of peaty material, charcoal and redeposited natural, and produced a well-made flint tanged arrowhead and a number of flint flakes and blades. C2 was another ditch, of similar dimensions to the linear component of C1, which was situated on the other side of the excavation area. It also followed a slightly curving alignment and again appeared to open out into a wide depression at the periphery of the excavation area. The fill of C2 was similar to that of C1 but it did not produce the prominent charcoal layer encountered in C1. It also produced an oblique pointed flint arrowhead (petit tranchet derivative; Dr Sarah Milliken, pers. comm.), a flint flake and flint blade.

C3 was a small U-sectioned trench which closely followed the line of the curving edge of C1. It truncated this edge and is therefore stratigraphically later than C1, but close contemporaneity is also indicated by its locational relationship with C1. C5 was a slightly larger U-sectioned trench which ran at a right angle from one edge of the linear part of C1.

The overall impression conveyed by this excavation was that it only presented a limited perspective of a much larger site. This interpretation arises both from the obviously partial nature of the archaeology which was examined and from the occurrence of clearly related deposits along the section faces of the open pipe trenches to the east and west of the excavation area. These deposits were not apparent on initial topsoil removal as they lay beneath a material similar to the upper fill of the archaeological features which itself differed in no easily definable manner from topsoil. It is therefore reasonable to assume that other similar features may exist beyond the boundary of the excavation area; this would seem more a probability than a possibility given the distribution of features within what was essentially a randomly located and arbitrarily defined excavation area. That a larger archaeological site, or indeed substantial archaeological complex, is present at Clonmagadden is also suggested by the identification of other potential features in the area during monitoring. It is difficult to interpret the nature of this archaeology in any satisfactory manner. It is beyond doubt that the material which was excavated is archaeological but, apart from the identification of a number of linear features of various configurations which contained artefacts, there are few definitive conclusions to be drawn from the site. Preliminary analysis would suggest a date in the late Neolithic to middle Bronze Age for the material excavated. A number of charcoal samples have been submitted for radiocarbon dating.